"Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops, like bishops, and your religious act like religious." - Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, 1972

Pages

Sunday, August 13, 2017

UNCHARTED

There's been something bugging me about the canonical trial. And it's this:

"However, Byrnes added there is no way of knowing how long these next steps will take or what the exact penalties could be. He said that he and canon lawyers he has consulted with are in uncharted waters, given that this is the first time in history that a canonical trial of this nature has been called for concerning a bishop."GUAM DAILY POST, July 6, 2017

It's the word "uncharted." The presumption is that this is "uncharted" because "this is the first time in history that a canonical trial of this nature has been called for concerning a bishop."

That's true, but that's what bothers me. Why should a legal process be "uncharted" just because the defendant is a bishop?" Sure there is the expectation of Vatican corruption and the good ol' boy network amongst bishops having each others backs as is commonly alleged, but those possibilities do not explain the word "uncharted."

Because few of us understand the canonical system (and per Byrnes' statement, apparently even many bishops don't), by default we compare it to our civil system where "no man (supposedly) is above the law." So regardless of the status of the defendant, the crime is the crime and there is nothing "uncharted" about it.

So what is "uncharted" about the trial of a bishop? Why would the legal processes within Church law not be the same for everyone regardless of the status of the accused?

I believe it's important for us to start thinking about this because while Apuron's guilt will probably be well established, the Roman Curia, and even the pope, may not have the authority to punish him. I will explain.

I have long been intrigued by Apuron's sinister exclamation: "No one can get me." At first I thought he was only referring to his power to crush anyone who spoke out against him. But as his canonical trial has drug on, with snippets of verbiage like "uncharted" falling out into the media here and there, I began to suspect something else.

First we must understand who Apuron is to the Neocatechumenal Way. Well, he's nothing to them and they would gladly dump him...except for the fact that his demise, thanks to the worldwide audience of this blog, is now inextricably linked to the corruption and thievery perpetrated by the NCW leadership in this diocese.

If Apuron goes down, it is quite possible it will cause a domino effect in dioceses around the world, where bishops are just waiting for a reason to rid themselves and their dioceses of these festering pests. Thus the neocats must prop up the cancerous wretch at all costs. But how to do that? That brings us to the second thing to understand:

The NCW is an immensely wealthy and powerful organization. It is not run by Kiko, who is little more than a mascot, a clown, a front for the filthy power brokers in Rome to take pictures with. No, the NCW is run by its own band of filthy power brokers, who have at their disposal money, money, and more money, as well as a whole platoon of lawyers, who we can be sure, have been deployed to get Apuron out of his mess. And if not for Bulldog Burke (pictured), he might have already been.

So how are they going to do this? The word "uncharted" is helpful here. I believe the reason the Vatican is in "uncharted" waters is not because this is the first bishop to be tried, but because of the reason no bishop has ever been tried, at least not like the trial Apuron is undergoing.

And what is that reason? I am fairly sure that this is the Neocat's nuclear option.

However, Lumen Gentium, while not denying the special authority of the Chair of Peter, introduced something new:

"The order of bishops, which succeeds to the college of apostles and gives this apostolic body continued existence, is also the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church." - Lumen Gentium, 22

On its face, the statement takes away the jurisdictional authority of the pope, or more to the point, removes the "Keys" as the source of Peter's authority and roots it in his headship over the Apostolic college, i.e. the bishops.

In short, Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, effectively did this:

I realize this is super complicated, and if you want to learn more, I would recommend the article from which I borrowed the above two graphics. (You can view my highlighted version here.) The question that such a transfer of authority proposes is this:

Do the bishops, being equals, and in possession of the "supreme and full power over the universal Church," even have the authority to sit in judgement on one another?

We certainly are in "uncharted" waters. But one thing that is NOT "uncharted" is the resolve of the people of the Archdiocese of Agana to NEVER permit Anthony S. Apuron to run this diocese ever again. We may not be able to stop what Rome does or doesn't do. But we are committed to FINANCIALLY BREAKING THIS DIOCESE should he ever show his face on Guam except in court...where one Walter G. Denton can at last look him straight in the eye.

Good question. This is the legacy of Vatican 2, ambiguity, ambiguity, ambiguity. Throughout all of the documents of Vatican, there is the restatement of doctrine followed by holes big enough to drive a truck through. And pretty much the bishops scripted themselves into positions of privilege and unilateral power. Thus Apuron's "no one can get me." You can blame John 23 for opening that window.

As I've said from the outset there's no canonical precedent for this type of case, so anything goes. The corrupt bishops are out to protect themselves at all costs, so filthy Apuron will probably skate.

Unfortunately, it was the corrupt bishops at Vatican II who put barriers in place to protect themselves. Francis can still do whatever he wishes, canonically permitted or otherwise, since there is no mechanism to stop him. So it will come down to Francis. However, it really is up to us.

Agreed. However, Francis continues to advertise that he doesn't play by the rules.

His unsupported, defunct child abuse Commission was a total farce. He even stuffed the Pontifical Academy for Life with notorious abortion and euthanasia advocates. How much lower he'll sink remains to be seen.

Catechism of the Catholic Church says: "The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, as its head." As such, this college has "supreme and full authority over the universal Church; BUT THIS POWER CANNOT BE EXERCISED WITHOUT THE AGREEMENT OF THE ROMAN PONTIFF."

On a personal note, I'm not smart at the computer, and I totally did not understand the new way you want people to make comments. I wish you would reconsider for the sake of us dinosaurs.

And this is why half a century after the close of the Council, the Church is in the absolute mess that it is in: because the documents of Vatican II, particularly Lumen Gentium, were cleverly written to disguise the real agenda - which was to weaken the papacy. The Catechism only states what on the surface Lumen Gentium states. And while it says that the college has no authority to act on its own unless it is united with the Roman Pontiff, it doesn't say that neither does the Roman Pontiff have authority to act on his own without the college. The new teaching ties the authority of the pope to the college of bishops. In short, he cannot act without their approval. Benedict 16 himself noted this when he was kicked out of office by them:

While the pope's authority was certainly not overthrown or called into question, it was set on a different foundation. Pope Benedict XVI himself recognized this when, a few days after his abdication, he spoke about the transfer of power to the episcopate that happened in light of Vatican II, discussing "those who sought a decentralization of the Church, power for the bishops and then, through the Word for the "people of God", the power of the people, the laity. There was this triple issue: the power of the Pope, then transferred to the power of the bishops and then the power of all... popular sovereignty" [33].https://www.diigo.com/user/timrohr47/b/411757667

It's very sobering, but we mustn't lose sight of the need to sometimes rescue the interests of the vulnerable in the flock from the stranglehold of prelates that aren't truly on board. By painting the Pope as a villain who reputedly oppresses little ones, they hope to deflect notice from the fact that it can be them doing so - whether when going off by themselves at tangents, or by ganging up. A bad type of bishop is probably more viewed by the "college" as "letting down the image" than as objectively doing evil - and even then, only on sexual abuse matters and not at all in regard to business practices. (The systems of the world, interestingly, are going to clobber the Church in regard to the latter not the former.)

Pray extra hard, while you have got people in authority in your church that appear genuinely on board, and don't stop other members of your diocese going over to supporting them likewise.

It's interesting what limits "collegiality" placed on the Metropolitan of Melbourne in 1997 or so.

You are committed to "financially breaking this diocese"? Go Gay for an easy payday . hopefully, we pray that when everything is said and done, when Archbishop Apuron verdict is rendered from his Canonical Trial, and upon his return to the Archdiocese of Agana as ARCHBISHOP, Tim Tim, COCKY Dabit, LuLu and Company need to seriously commit suicide.. Thanks!!

1:18 AM, that comment, "go gay for an easy payday," is unwarranted and uneducated. Sexual predation in this case, I believe, is about deluded grasp for power/control and an unresolved sexual assault in earlier life. The ones who had courage enough to reveal sexual abuse by priests never asked for it, never wanted it happen to them, and are now trying to find justice. Granted there may be falsehood and frivolity in a number of cases filed, our job is to validate the cry of abuse and weed out those who may just be in it for a quick rich scheme. If you want to go against anyone, set your sights on the perpetrators and their defenders, the vulture lawyers out to destroy the church such as the SNAP network, and those in church leadership who glossed over the cycle of abuse within their ranks. Do not go around bashing homosexuality because it reveals your ignorance and clueless humanity. Do not go around proclaiming that Apuron will regain his title because, regardless of the judgment rendered by the canonical trial, we have already spit him out of our system, and heaven be damned if our righteous indignation will be thwarted by this arrogant cleric who squandered sacred trust and golden opportunity to faithfully minister as the voice and heart of Christ. Just a word of advice: seek the Truth in your own heart rather than parrot the media blurb of your neo-masters. You are made for higher things by God and not to waddle in the filth of humanity's pigsty.

Don't bank on "Bulldog Burke" nailing Apuron. Self-preservation is the first law of Nature. He won't sever his perilously thin lifeline to Rome over a worthless pervert jungle bishop. Burke didn't get his red hat by being apolitical. He's still part of the Establishment.

The few openly homosexual diocesan priests left here were all sidelined and shipped to small outlying parishes as Pastors or Administrators. Formerly a highly influential elitist clique that was systematically protected by the chancery, the mainstream laity no longer tolerates them. The pedophile priests and religious who cost this diocese over $70 million in abuse settlements are all active homosexuals. Sadly, money is the only thing that talks.

The only local parishes where openly homosexual priests and parishoners still flourish are run by wealthy religious Orders our lame and greedy bishop won't touch. As usual, the obscenely rich and tres gay Jesuits lead that pack of heretics.